The mushy muddle
Just tell me this:
When editorial columnists tell Republican Party leaders that they need to appeal to centrist voters, why do they always recommend softening the GOP opposition to abortion, embryonic research, and same-sex unions? Couldn't a more "moderate" stand on the war in Iraq have the same effect? Or a more "middle-of-the-road" approach to capital-gains taxes?
Or how about this: Why shouldn't the Democrats be prodded toward the mainstream on these issues? Couldn't they, too, attract more centrist voters, if they weren't such doctrinaire defenders of the culture of death?
In short, why is "moderation" demanded of conservatives but not liberals? And why is it important only on social issues?
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our year-end goal ($63,989 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: -
Sep. 01, 2004 11:34 PM ET USA
Don't get me wrong, I'm a little angered by the Republican party. However, every single night of the convention, I've heard the terms "pro-lfe", "pro-marriage", and "pro-ethical stem cell research." The party is not exactly hiding it's socially conservative agenda, so please, Phil, cool your heels. We're doing a lot better than we were doing four years ago and much better than we will be doing if a to-remain-nameless Catholic gets elected.
Posted by: principle not pragmatism -
Sep. 01, 2004 6:55 PM ET USA
This is the fault of the Republican establishment. The want to hold onto those "moderate republicans". Why rock the boat?
Posted by: -
Sep. 01, 2004 6:35 PM ET USA
It makes my blood boil, when liberal extremists are called "moderate." What is moderate about tearing babies apart limb from limb, or unnatural sexual acts, or endlessly smearing the President ? The term, moderate, has long since lost all meaning and should no longer be used by anyone. Call the left-wing extemists and promoters of the culture of death by a more accurate label: like SATANIDES, offspring of the fiend !
Posted by: Franko -
Sep. 01, 2004 5:24 PM ET USA
This must be a rhetorical question! The media elite editorial writers believe they are the center. So of course everyone needs to be more like them. After all they are for Choice, Inclusion, etc. As a lifelong Democrat it is amazing to me how far the Party Leadership has gone along with this. I am no longer at home in my party but I don't feel like a republican yet either.
Posted by: frjimc -
Sep. 01, 2004 5:16 PM ET USA
Good point, Phil; did you ever notice that the national news media never describe anyone as a "moderate Democrat"? Or an "arch-liberal" for that matter? Semantic wars, again. When they ask pro-lifers to be "moderate," what they're really saying is, "abandon your moral principles completely." Because if we're "moderate" in their eyes, we're really unprincipled. Why is it, do you think, that Democrats are not asked to modify their pro-abortion views? Could they abandon their principles?